https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31936
--- Comment #5 from Srikanth Logic <srik....@gmail.com> 2011-10-31 21:52:08 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > Guys, you're finding problems for a solution. > > WebFonts is mainly created to hugely improve *computer illiterate's reading > experience*. We know that editors are often way better schooled and more > computer literate, so that they have the skills to choose a font of their > liking and install that on their computer. However, those that have not, will > never, ever get a proper reading experience in the above scenario. That's just > wrong, i.e. you/we MediaWiki veterans are being elitists here, and you're > killing your pool of potential contributors. There is a problem here in understanding.Let me expand each preference with reason. >>1. Enable Webfonts to all, with no default font. This will try to increase >>readerbase without compromising existing readerbase. So best from community >>PoV Any technological change must be progressive in nature. If WebFonts is enabled with a default font, its going 2 steps back giving a poorer font for 99% of existing readerbase(includes anons and computer illiterates who have fonts installed and may not be aware the poorer font is due to Webfonts,there is a option to turn it off) who have better fonts for the sake of accommodating 1%. So essentially there is a concern on loosing some of the readers. The 1% neednt be a computer literate to select a font from drop down. http://stats.grok.se/ta/201110/Wikipedia:Font_help is ranked 20 on site traffic, so it isnt true that all those people close the page upon seeing squares.Now if WebFonts is installed without default font, the Font help page will say choose the font on browser to read. >> 2. Enable Webfonts only to logged in users with a default preference as >> >> false,so users who want fonts(say that 1 admin) alone has access and >> rest feel no difference. This will not increase readerbase, but will help >> >> logged in users,also can be added as one other reason to create an >> account. Choosing this option would mean, we dont affect the experience of anon-readers, but editors have a choice to use WebFonts. Please note there are student-editors who use lab machines and not always have rights to install fonts. The intent of asking only for logged users is not elitist. Its in the best interest of pool of potential contributors. When most of them have a better font, why feed them inferior font and shy them away? Some Personal thoughts, we could discuss below thing when we meet at conference :) *computer illiterate's reading experience* --> Please assume some intelligence for the normal literate's who are computer illiterates. To give a context, due to various issues which caused a late unicode adoption for Tamil, most Tamil users know they may need to have site specific fonts(there are still those non unicode sites) and have been installing fonts, and if we give them an option and ask them to choose from dropdown instead of setting it default, it wont be pain for them. While am not elitist,at the risk of sounding politically incorrect I would say this :- Potential contributors will find their way around and people have always found their way till now.So while WebFonts will help more people read, lets not overshoot and say, not having WebFonts / not setting a default font would mean killing potential contributors. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug. You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Wikibugs-l mailing list Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
